MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176963029 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcab079

Deer exclusion unveils abiotic filtering in forest understorey plant assemblages

2021· article· en· W3176963029 on OpenAlexaffabout
Simon Chollet, Christophe Baltzinger, Morgane Maillard, Jean‐Louis Martin

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsEcologyBiologyAbiotic componentOdocoileusHerbivoreUnderstorySpecies richnessEcosystemPlant communityBiodiversityCanopy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The role of deer (family Cervidae) in ecosystem functioning has traditionally been neglected by forest ecologists due to the animal's scarcity in most parts of the northern hemisphere. However, the dramatic rebound in deer populations throughout the 20th century has brought deer browsing to the forefront of forest ecological questioning. Today there is ample evidence that deer affect tree regeneration, understorey plant and animal diversity, and even litter decomposition. However, the mechanisms underlying the effects of deer on forest ecosystems remain unclear. Among others, the relative role of abiotic factors versus biotic interactions (e.g. herbivory) in shaping plant assemblages remains largely unknown. METHODS: We used a large-scale experiment with exclosures distributed along abiotic gradients to understand the role of black-tailed deer (Odocoileus hemionus sitchensis) on the forest understorey on the Haida Gwaii archipelago (western Canada), a unique context where most of the key ecological effects of deer presence have already been intensively studied. KEY RESULTS: Our results demonstrate that 20 years of deer exclusion resulted in a clear increase in vascular plant richness, diversity and cover, and caused a decline in bryophyte cover. Exclusion also unveiled abiotic (i.e. soil water availability and fertility) filtering of plant assemblages that would otherwise have been masked by the impact of abundant deer populations. However, deer exclusion did not lead to an increase in beta diversity, probably because some remnant species had a competitive advantage to regrow after decades of over browsing. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that long-term herbivory by deer can be a dominant factor structuring understorey plant communities that overwhelms abiotic factors. However, while exclosures prove useful to assess the overall effects of large herbivores, the results from our studies at broader scales on the Haida Gwaii archipelago suggest that exclosure experiments should be used cautiously when inferring the mechanisms at work.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207